Nicole Kidman has decided not to publish her diary from the time she spent filming Australia, as well as being in her early pregnancy stages. A few parts of it have been published however:
The actress thought it would be a great idea to chronicle the making of the Baz Luhrmann film with a journal but the remote location, her on-set pregnancy and lots of time to mull over her life left Kidman pouring out all her secrets.
She says, “I was going to release the diary and then I thought, ‘No, I can’t release it, this is too personal.’ Then bits of it ended up in the press, so people have read little bits of it.”
The diary might be a bit personal, but the way it was written we honestly thought it was intended for publication. Perhaps it’s the fact that she comes across as a bit of a self obsessed bimbo might have also influenced her decision not to publish. The other thing maybe influencing her is that Australia is looking to be less of a hit than hoped.
Following a string of misses including The Invasion, Fur, Birth and The Hours (sure, she won an Oscar for it, but who went and saw it?), Australia is meant to be Nic’s big return to Hollywood following her marriage and baby. Unfortunately, she’s not getting great reviews for it.
Australia the movie, however, has one huge problem. It stars Nicole Kidman. Big mistake. Big, big mistake. At a stroke, the world’s female cinemagoers will say as one: “I’m not going to see it if she’s in it.”
Kidman is one of those women who turns other women off. And no, not just because she’s pretty and we’re jealous. It is because we perceive, and men don’t, that she’s one of the most overrated actors in the world, a woman who has been the kiss of death in practically every movie she has starred in.
Kidman is exquisitely accomplished at being awful. Did anyone see Cold Mountain? The sweeping American epic (note: another epic) foundered on the rocks of her gormless mirror-gaze. She can’t act. Instead, she drifts around films like a lost porcelain doll, looking frozen, brittle and vapid, staring at the camera with her oh-golly-look-how-I’m-looking-interesting blue eyes.
I don’t think women universally hate Nicole Kidman, although I have to admit to being a fan, I still find that in recent years her ability to emote has left her. Perhaps because I expect that a woman of her age should have some kind of control over her emotions, or at least control of her facial expressions.
Baz Lurhmann is famous for his stylized performances, and maybe this is what he was going for, but I know that at 2hours 45minutes long this movie is going to have to be really, really good. Or a ticket comes with bonus butt pillow, and a whole lot of Hugh Jackman shirtless.
The Times article about Nic’s performance wasn’t their review of Australia, just an article about Nicole being the wrong choice of leading lady, and is generally positive, giving it 4 out of 5 stars. They say the film is cliched, but is saved by the way the epic is handled with ‘jokes and asides’. And a Hugh Jackman shower scene.
Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban are shown at the premiere of Australia in LA on 11/24/08. Credit: MLM/Fame Pictures
I just find the Nicole Kidman of today frightfully boring — especially when juxtaposed against the wildhaired, gangly, freckled, reckless Aussie lass of Dead Calm. She used to be so much more interesting when she was married to Cruise — was that because she had this aura of mystery or something surrounding her?
Seriously. What the hell DID she do to her face? She could have aged so gorgeously. I thought she looked so elegant in Eyes Wide Shut, even though I LOATHED that movie.
look at the neck muscles she has to strain in her attempt to “smile”. sad.
Shame. I was so looking forward to that diary. 🙄
That Times article is unfair. She has a number of great performances behind her – eg. To Die For, Birthday Girl, Dogville. She’s either lost her passion for movie-making or has just made particularly bad choices over the last few years.
She is such a different person today than she was ten years ago. She looks and acts fundamentally unnatural. Like she is an automation. After Moulin Rouge and Hours, I thought that she had learned to act like every actor should eventually. Sadly it seems that I was wrong. I saw tha ‘Australia’ trailer and she is really that bad. Hope the whole movie makes up for it.
What’s with the white raccoon eyes in the photos? She looks like she fell asleep on a tanning bed.
At long last universal acknowldgement that Nicole Kidman is a below average actress ;o)
All she ever does is whisper her lines for emotional effect with her frozen face.
I am still convinced that she became such a ‘fantastic Oscar winning actres’ in the eyes of the industry and media because Tom Cruise dumped her before 10 years and was the villian. She was suddenly elevated into A-list actressdom when it was not deserved.
The only film I can bear to watch with her in is Moulin Rouge and that is because the film is such a visual sensation that even a 2-dimensional actress cannot dampen the brilliance of it.
THANK YOU for mentioning Dogville geronimo. If Nicole was to get an Oscar it should have been for that one as it has been the best performance of hers I’ve ever seen. Perhaps it’s because the director was Lars von Trier who takes no prisoners and hauled that performance out of her?
(For the record, I don’t consider it a flop, even though far fewer people saw it as it is very much an art house film).
Now she was good in The Hours, but Julianne Moore wiped the floor with both her and Meryl Streep and Miranda Richardson kept stealing scenes from Nicole. Again, Nicole was fine, but it was a bit like this monologue was going in her head – “Acting, Acting, writers-block acting, Acting, Acting, long-intense stare, kiss Miranda Richardson, Acting Acting”.
I think it’s just that she has a very mannered acting style coupled with that porcelain doll expression, although she does a decent job of most roles, you never feel she breathes real life into the character, unlike say, Laura Linney.
Again, maybe it’s the directors, they just don’t draw it out of her?
It’s hard to act when your face can’t show emotion. It kind of makes me angry that she did that to herself, she was a beauty (key word: was) and would have aged beautifully.
I’d pay just to see Hugh in the shower, though.
I would LOVE to like Nicole Kidman’s acting, except I can’t, because I don’t ever see her acting. What I see anymore on screen is a woman whose features are so carefully preserved by Botox and collagen, that it’s impossible for her make any kind of normal human expressions. She is, I’ll grant, a very perfectly formed woman. Perfection, however, does not make the best environment in which a skilled actress can lose herself in whatever role she’s taken on. She’s never Character X or Y: she’s always, only, a Very Perfect Nicole Kidman. That’s why I’ll never spend money to see her films.
the only movie I ever liked her in was Dead Calm, which is an awesome movie, one of her first ones, before any plastic surgery whatsoever. now shejust sucks is is truly overrated.
I think so many actresses become Joker-looking as they try to find eternal youth. I’ll admit I use peels and facial trratments – may even get a small lift someday. But you should look as if it were natural and you just age well – a few lines.
I think NK would look a lot better if her hair were darker. She’s sort of monochromatic me thinks. Her eyes don’t pop like they did when she had it a darker red. You’d think someone who had done that much to her face would be ok with a bottle of Claroil.
I NEVER cared for Nicole Kidman. Something about her makes me think that if she and I would have gone to high school together, she would have been really mean to me and I’d have been forced to beat the shit out of her in the bathroom. I REALLY wanted to like her during/after the Tom thing, but all I could manage was disliking him more than I already disliked her. Also- the only thing I ever saw her in where she was worth a damn was To Die For. Other than that….. girl cain’t get right.
I agree 100% with this line: “I don’t think women universally hate Nicole Kidman, although I have to admit to being a fan, I still find that in recent years her ability to emote has left her.”
I actually liked her in Days of Thunder (was that the name?) with Tom Cruise and I LOVED Moulin Rouge. In addition, I thought the movie where she and the children were dead but thought they were alive was pretty interesting (sorry… can’t remember the name and am not looking it up). I would say she’s probably an average actress, but I like her anyway. She’s not horrible and I’ve seen worse, but she WAS much more beautiful and easy to look at before she messed up her face with whatever she did.
Each of you will laugh, but I also have to admit to having liked the Stepford Wives… 😳 Don’t ask me why, but I just liked that movie and her in it.
I saw The Hours and loved it – that was the last Kidman performance I actually enjoyed. Mairead is right though, Streep and Moore were more deserving of accolades for their performances. And Ed Harris, but he’s always one the most underrated actors.
Cold Mountain was one of the first films in this string of disasters where Kidman was grossly miscast – Ada should have been younger, should have been more Southern, less frozen.
When I saw Kidman on Oprah a couple of weeks ago, I was actually shocked – she’s doing so much to her face, she looks like a frozen clown. *shiver*
I am also a fan, and while I realize she is not the best actress of her generation this smacks of a Cruise/Scientology-driven article. It’s suspicious to me that The Times would devote an article to insulting Kidman, as oppose to folding it in with a review of the movie.
Typically Tiny Tom over-the-top antics, in my paranoid, conspiracy-theory mind. I need some pumkin pie.
Re: The Hours, Helen writes: “(sure, she won an Oscar for it, but who went and saw it?)”
*Really*, Helen? Have you seen it? She embodied Woolf with compassion, grace, and wisdom. Streep, Moore, Harris, and Kidman were all amazing.
Come on.
No one mentions “The Others.” I thought she was amazing in that. I concede that the botox is backfiring. I never understood why so many people can’t stand her. For years she was “too cold” and I suppose now she’s “too stiff.”
@ Levi – THAT’S IT!!! I couldn’t remember the name of the movie I was talking about above, but you’ve just said it… The Others – excellent movie.
Thanks for posting – the name of the movie would have bothered me all day, but not enough to make me want to look it up 😆
The pale haircolor doesn’t do a thing for her. Wonder if she’s prematurely gray?
Anyway, she ought to go back to her natural red. Would inject a little life into her face. Miss the natural curls, too.
I loved To Die For. But agree that her appearance is too bizarre these days. Her brow looks as though it’s about to crumble beneath the weight of her forehead.
I LOVED Cold Mt and Moulin Rouge.
I LIKED Bewitched adn the STepford Wives.
I like Nic and want to see her have a good career.
she doesnt even seem like a real person to me.
Why did she mess with her face? I would love to have seen her age naturally, she had such a unique look before. Too bad, how can anyone “project” anything through a wall of botox or smile with lips that are full of a chemical substance? Meg Ryan did the same thing to her face. GROSS.
lol, I wondered if Australia would dodge the curse of Kidman and not be a turkey. Maybe it’ll make money regardless of the critics’ panning.
It’s not that we don’t like her films it’s that she picks the wrong ones. Someone mentioned The Others – I liked that one – but yes, generally if her name is on the cast list I’ll pass. Nothing to do with jealousy. More to do with the fact that she has the same problem as Tom Cruise: it never seems like a character she just happens to be playing more like ‘Nicole Kidman as…’. Something about her just seems unnatural and I just can’t keep watching.
So maybe she should do more supernatural horrors? I don’t think she tanked The Golden Compass, but I could be wrong.
That movie The Others was a direct ripoff of Bruce Willis’ movie The sixth sense. They didn’t even have the good sense to wait until that movie cooled off before they let THE OTHERS stink up the box office.
Haven’t seen it but if she whispers her way through Australia as she has her last few movies she’s a goner. I won’t bother with the movie – I did Australian history at school
oh, and in private she’s up herself. I think that’s what women are picking up on – that general ‘I’m better than you’-ness that she projects
“especially when juxtaposed against the wildhaired, gangly, freckled, reckless Aussie lass of Dead Calm.”
I totally agree. Now she looks like some Hamptons matron who’s totally whacked out on prescription painkillers by 2 p.m.
But I thought she was excellent in To Die For and The Others. Maybe she’s just really good at playing women who suppress their emotions, for one reason or another.
women are always critized more than men. hugh doesn’t do anything for me after seeing him shake his butt lookin a litte feminine….he turns me off..
as for nicole i don’t hate her, i like her.
When you see her performances in her first american movies she had real promise (I never saw the australien stuff)…then she married the heir of Xenu and things when downhill from there gradually at first but accelerated when she seperated from him!!
Last year some magazine made a list of the most overpaid actresses ie those that cost a fortune but do not deliver box office wise, she was number one. So it’s safe to say that she is indeed way over rated.
Finally it is true that over the last few years she has turned into this thin overbotoxed pale anorexic ghost unable to emote. just managing from time to time that lip less little tense grin of hers.
Such a waste…
PS: Hugh Jackman is turning into her male counterpart. Other than xmen every other movie he’s stared in has been a dud (same for his producing efforts on tv or in film…)…for whom the bell tolls!
Russel Crowe is really the only ozzy actor that is a true box office winner and on top of that a great actor (though he does seem to have temper issues). He’s picked up Mel Gibson’s mantel in the best way. now if he doesn’t get more obnoxious as he gets older like poor Mel he might have a chance to actually get some good work done.
She was pretty good in the others. She hasn’t been terrible in EVERY movie she’s been in.
That article is waaaay too bitchy. What separated Nicole Kidman from other actresses was that she was beautiful and a very subtle actress. Unfortunately Botox kills all subtlety. She should really accept her age and get back to excelling at her profession. She will still be beautiful. As is it is, she doesn’t look any younger, since we all now associate that kind of frozen face with age.
My favorite Nicole Kidman films are “The Others” and “Malice”. Great acting performances in terrific movies.
She should have won the Oscar for “The Others” — she’s onscreen practically every minute, in a part that a lesser actress would have reduced to unrelenting screams and hysterics. Kidman modulates emotion and tension for an incredibly dramatic, suspenseful and terrifying result of a film. It still gives me chills just to think about it. I highly recommend it if you haven’t seen it yet.
She was good in “To Die For’. Otherwise….meh.
This article really articulates what’s so off-putting about Nicole: there’s no life spirit to her. She’s flat, dull and boring. Is it asking too much to have actors actually be lively, vibrant… interesting?
Totally agree with the comment that her current “serious actress” status is due to the PR sympathy blitz she rode on after Tom Cruise dumped her. She’s acted like a delusional botoxed princess ever since.
Kate Winslet and others are so much more real and compelling to me. Nicole belongs to the china doll robot acting school perfected by the likes of Gwyneth Paltrow. Yawn.
the Others and To Die For were/are excellent. I have been a fan of Nic for quite some time but I have to agree I think in the last five years she has become quite ‘bland’. And its really a shame because when she was younger she was quite passionate and sparky. I do think it has to do with a lack of animation in her face partly, she is a really lovely woman who would look much better just left completely natural.
I think she’s either had a really good agent and/or manager because her choice of films (for the most part) has been a good fit for her style.
I don’t know if I’m a fan of Kidman (Eye’s Wide Shut was awful and I didn’t see Days of Thunder because even back then I couldn’t stand Cruise).
Dead Calm was great, I liked Malice, I loved The Others (much better film than Sixth Sense – I didn’t figure it out five minutes in like with the Sixth Sense). To Die For was fabulous, Dogville is one of my favourite movies, probably because Von Trier is one of my fav directors. I liked Moulin Rouge and Cold Mountain in spite of myself (the only thing wrong with the movie was Kidman herself. She was fine while struggling by herself but when she supposed to give it up with passion, she’s completely unconvincing).
I really need to rent The Hours.
Wow, people are being pretty hard on Nicole. If I imagine myself trying to play any of those roles, forget it. She was really outstanding in “To Die For” and did pretty well in “The Hours” too. I’m sorry if Australia is turning out to be a big dud. It would be nice to see her do well after the baby and after she’s really moved on from Tom. I don’t think her success was dependent on him. Besides, this is one film in a career. Imagine somebody like Michael Caine or Sean Connery. Made lots of good films, and lots of B and maybe even C films in between.
Hope she hangs in there.
i agree with mairead – julianne moore should have gotten an oscar for the hours. her performance was so moving it made me cry. i like nic but since she started cutting up her face her talent has gone out the window. with no way to show emotion on her face how can she still act? the answer is she can’t.
I don’t know. It’s like Nic is saying being a gingery, Irish person is wrong. Same thing like M.Jackson, seems he’s saying being an African-American is wrong. Anyone who transforms themselves like these two is evident that there is something very wrong under the surface.
I know Nic is from Australia, BTW.
Wow, why her eyes all wonky? She looks matronly and older than she is. I’ll watch her movies because I like Australian actors and actresses. She’s okay acting wise, better in lighter fare. I think something’s going on under the surface with her.
Did anyone see her interview recently with David Letterman?!? AWFUL~! She was so horribly uncomfortable it made me squirm just watching. She seems very self-absorbed. I did love “The Others,” but have not seen anything else of hers that I found interesting.
Actually- her playing the evil B!t(h alongside Alec Baldwin and (???) forget his name in (???) forget the movie name was pretty good too. She got to play the coniving Beeatch I think she may be in person….
BOTOX. I liked her in Dead Calm; I feel sorry for her for the whole Tom Cruise (umm, psycho!?) debacle and that it seems she is now detached from her adopted children — HOWEVER…if my non-metrosexual, uncultured hubby can see she is botoxed to the hilt and seems to be an ice princess to booot? Good luck, Nicole…your career is OVER.
I have met her many times and I have to say she is a delightful person, regardless of what you think of her films. And it’s weird, in person she doesn’t look nearly as “botoxy”. But I haven’t seen her in person in about a year I guess. She is prematurely grey and she hasn’t been dying her hair because of the baby.
I don’t believe that for a second Ron, because if she were that concerned about effects on the baby she wouldn’t be having her lips pumped up with a synthetic injectible which HAS to be maintained every 6 months or so.
She was good in the early days and then after Moulin she became more concerned with her image and her looks and her Chanel endorsements and whatever. Her acting has suffered as a result.
I read that she has a lip implant. But I’m guessing she must also receive injections of filler.
I liked her in “To Die For” and “The Others”.
That’s about it for me.
See, the thing is that she was as over rated for so long by big wig horny producers and directors who wanted to see her half dressed for so long (kind of like the Darryl Hannah annoyance phase. I do not understand this phenomena. There are so many other better looking women. Sometimes, these actresses need to quit while behind. And she is not being very honest about the “I do not use botx, do not smoke only uses sunblock” oh please…this was in one of interviews in that “Marie…??/” magazine…even the statement is rather arrogant. I would have maybe accepted that she uses soap and water…but that other crap about smoking…is she advertising that no smoking shit? I mean please w/ this. ENOUGH ALrEADY about smoking. JEEES…it’s so old…..and good skin has more to do with STAYING THE HELL OUT OF THE SUN so that SUNSCREEN will not be USED so OFTEN. Also, goos skin has to do w/ genetics…Nicole, face it, you’re old like the rest of us. Stop playing the star and be a little humble…audiences like humulity not “I’m better than…” and she may as well have said that…For now, Katie takes the lead where skin is concerned AND when SHE turns 40, she will have the same damned problems..get over it
Sorry, Hated Moulin Rouge and that boat movie…those were annoying show-off films…good in “The Others” (b/c she was matronly for a change…but just not THAT into her otherwise..
I searched for a website to comment about Nicole b/c I watched “To Die For” (I have been trying to watch this since it came out in 1995 (too anxiety ridden for me) and could not stand it for the first 15 minutes.
Finally in 2009 I finished watching this movie tonight all the way through maninly for the sake of the co-performers and the original meaning of this based on the Pamela Smart story”
She was only
” SOOOOOO Great” B/c playing self is not that difficult to do. Gus Van Sant is a bit of a dom = dirty old man kinda guy…he’s too into this look in every film he makes…and “Elephant” Was AWFUL